Too smart to Lead or being a Multiplier? What makes a great Manager?

Current Research on the Human Factors site says its possible to be 'too smart to lead'. I bought it when I read it because I like to take things as intended, and let it settle.

Now without repeating the article too much (you are smart enough to read it methinks) the premise is that you can be really smart (high iq) but that it will have a negative influence over how persuasive you can be and therefore impacting your abilities as a leader. Now, I don't quite buy it. Firstly because persuasion is not the only factor at play for great leadership (as you will see below), and second, because I am curious to see if this applies as a general rule about IQ vs EQ. Do they really directly affect each other? Or, if you are well endowed in one area, does that automatically mean you must be stunted in the other? It seems a little too straightforward, and psychology doesn't usually play nicely like that.

I heard Liz Wiseman an author on NPR this morning on the way to work, and she had just written a book called Multipliers, describing how some managers bring out the best in their employees. The question this book asks is 'are you a genius or a genius maker'?

So this is one factor in being a good manager, trusting that 'people are smart' and not thinking 'they can't make this decision without me'.

I am not a manager, I have done a bit of this when I worked in hospitality, but the very psychology of management fascinates me. What makes a great manager? If the job is bringing out the best in people then it might not be the ability to get the work done. It might be the ability to get others to get the job done, but this skill is not what gets you into the role (letting other people do the work), its the smarts, and being an expert at the very things you want others to be good at. It's a conundrum. To be successful you have to be good at both, but according to the research link at the top of this post, you can't, you are limited that way.

So I am not a manager yet, but the biggest thing I take away from this, is if someday I become a manager, it will be like starting all over again, and I will have to nurture a totally different skill set and the question I ask myself is, will I want to do this?

Being good at my job in User Experience and Research fascinates me more, and while management is the obvious step up (everyone needs to grow to be happy, see 'The happiness project', by Gretchen Rubin), I would much rather become extremely good at what I do.

I think Liz may have the edge on this one, because some people are really smart and are pretty good at bringing out the best in people too. What do you think?